2001 PLP 3071 (YLR)
BASHIR AHMAD and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2001 PLP 3071 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J |
| Parties | BASHIR AHMAD and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 3071 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 3071 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 3071 (YLR) (BASHIR AHMAD and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tariq Zulfiqar Ahmad Chaudhary for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing: 7th October, 2001
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/148/149‑‑‑Bail, grant of had already been admitted to bail and the case against the accused was not in any manner dissimilar to or distinguishable from the case against co‑accused‑‑‑No reason existed as to why the accused could not be treated in the same manner in the matter of bail as the co‑accused who was already admitted to bail. Arshad Ali Chohan for the Complainant. Nazar Abbas Kanwar for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Tariq Zulfiqar Ahmad Chaudhary for Petitioners. Arshad Ali Chohan for the Complainant. Nazar Abbas Kanwar for the State. Date of hearing: 7th October, 2001 Through this petition Bashir Ahmad and Muhammad Ali petitioners have sought post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.109 registered at Police Station Sadar, Arifwala, District Pakpattan Sharif on 8‑3‑2001 for offences under sections 148/302/149, P.P.C.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record it has been noticed that a co‑accused of the present petitioners namely Muhammad Ramzan has already been admitted to post‑arrest bail in this case by this Court vide order, dated 17‑5‑2001 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1017‑B of 2001. It is not disputed that the case against the present petitioners is not in any manner dissimilar to or distinguishable from the case against the abovementioned co‑accused. In these circumstances there is no reason why the present petitioners in any not be treated in the same manner in the matter of bail as their co‑accused who has already been admitted to bail. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand only) each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./B‑61/L???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.